You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Disbeief in the matter of private revelation is understandable from a non- or lapsed-Catholic. I would not view that as an "attack" on Catholicism, as long as it wasn't over-the-top insulting. But you also insulted ("attacked") St. Faustina as having "too much vino," saying in the process, obviously, that that is the "source" of her visions. Don't be surprised if some people jump down your throat a bit for it. I also wouldn't be so quick to dismiss *all* private revelation out-of-hand. Sure, there are tons of fakes, but there are those which stand up to scrutiny, too. I've briefly mentioned two of them. It *does* seem that they are legit, and that what was alleged to occur at them *did*, in fact occur. No "Bayside" they!
***Sure, there are tons of fakes, but there are those which stand up to scrutiny, too.****
How dare you impune Oral Roberts' vision of a 600 foot Jesus in the desert telling Oral he better come up with so much money or Jesus would take him "home"!
Or my local neighbor who claimed God told him NOT to pay his union dues, but other Christian members still can!
Ok, so I am being sarcastic, and very distrustful of modern day "signs, visions, and woders."